A comment on my recent post about Nathaniel Rich's article in Rolling Stone sent me off to the True Justice for Meredith Kercher site. That site vehemently disputes the accuracy of Rich's article.
Do visit the site if, like me, you're getting your first information about Knox's case from Rich's article. At the very least, it provides food for thought.
Also, it's worth mentioning that there are a couple of major drawbacks to reading the all-pages version of a Rolling Stone story. One is that, weirdly, the author is not credited. The other is that you can't see the comments. In this case, the comments are contentious and sharply divided. If you'd like to see them, here's the link.
The gross disparity between what Rich and the True Justice site claim illustrates the difficulty in arriving at the truth in these matters. It also shows why I don't care to follow such stories. What, after all, does the truth matter to me when I know no one involved with the case? And what does my opinion matter when no one involved with the case knows me?
I didn't say one way or the other in my original post, but merely linking to Rich's article suggests that I endorse it. I don't. I'm not saying it's wrong on any or all counts: I don't know. I don't care enough to find out, either.
No comments:
Post a Comment